Re: Adopting a plural
| From: | John Cowan <jcowan@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Tuesday, October 5, 2004, 20:46 |
|---|
Andreas Johansson scripsit:
> Given that _virii_ apparently is meant to be a pl of _virus_ (which in Latin
> pluralizes as _vira_), I suspect Jeffrey supposedly wrote wrong forms,
> suggesting he intends to use that in the conlang too.
In fact, _virus_ 'slime, poison, stench' is a mass noun not recorded in
the plural. It's generally thought to have been a 2nd-declension neuter
with the irregular ending -us, but the evidence is equivocal.
> Anyway, I thought it should be _octopodes_?
Indeed. And _rhinocerotes_, too. But in English it's viruses, octupuses,
and rhinoceroses (or just rhinos).
But I took the original examples like "virii" to be about *misapplied*
foreign plural endings; other such words would be "agendae" and "hoodla".
--
We call nothing profound jcowan@reutershealth.com
that is not wittily expressed. John Cowan
--Northrop Frye (improved) http://www.reutershealth.com
Replies